Look, Apple makes great products and I can't stand companies that tries to copy off them. Apple earning and outselling every competitor is great news but if it's killing off every player in this field it's detrimental to us as consumers. Motorola & RIM are already dead. Apple is slowly lynching HP & Dell. Google and Windows will soon walk away into oblivion. It's always good to have choices even if they are bad choices. What if Apple kills off Amazon with Ibook, buys communication service provider like Verizon and kills off other service providers because they don't have Iphone, offers credit service and kills off Visa. Yes I'm over reaching here. But Apple has the money. Why buy manufacturers when they can buy out companies like Netflix and start Apple TV? Apple has the potential to kill off every company operating in US. How is that any good unless you own Apple stocks or working for Apple?

Apple won't buy out companies like that. Even if they wanted to, there could be antitrust issues because of their size. Apple generates sales from within. So they buy relatively small companies for their technology, software or hardware, and incorporate it within their own products. Usually, even if that company has a product, Apple kills it off.

Look, Apple makes great products and I can't stand companies that tries to copy off them. Apple earning and outselling every competitor is great news but if it's killing off every player in this field it's detrimental to us as consumers. Motorola & RIM are already dead. Apple is slowly lynching HP & Dell. Google and Windows will soon walk away into oblivion. It's always good to have choices even if they are bad choices. What if Apple kills off Amazon with Ibook, buys communication service provider like Verizon and kills off other service providers because they don't have Iphone, offers credit service and kills off Visa. Yes I'm over reaching here. But Apple has the money. Why buy manufacturers when they can buy out companies like Netflix and start Apple TV? Apple has the potential to kill off every company operating in US. How is that any good unless you own Apple stocks or working for Apple?

What do you recommend they do? Start performing worse on purpose? Blow the $100B in the Bank on Hookers and Coke parties?

Just like any person or entity, they have no obligation to let others succeed. This doesn't mean they have to play dirty and cheat other companies/people, it does however mean that they have one focus: To do the best that they could and strive as high as they can. Other companies are constantly ripping off Apple in attempts to "take them down", so why should Apple put those other companies' best interests in their consideration?

What do you recommend they do? Start performing worse on purpose? Blow the $100B in the Bank on Hookers and Coke parties?

Just like any person or entity, they have no obligation to let others succeed. This doesn't mean they have to play dirty and cheat other companies/people, it does however mean that they have one focus: To do the best that they could and strive as high as they can. Other companies are constantly ripping off Apple in attempts to "take them down", so why should Apple put those other companies' best interests in their consideration?

No. Why do you automatically assume I would want Apple to do any such thing as leveling the field for their competitors? I'm just saying it's not a good thing for us as consumers if Apple involuntarily kills all their competitors through striving as high as they can. You're talking like an employee of Apple, not as a consumer.

No. Why do you automatically assume I would want Apple to do any such thing as leveling the field for their competitors? I'm just saying it's not a good thing for us as consumers if Apple involuntarily kills all their competitors through striving as high as they can. You're talking like an employee of Apple, not as a consumer.

I buy the best product that I can. I don't care if it comes from Apple or if I have a selection of a hundred different companies products. Though, I use tech for tech, not for fashion statements. Therefore, visual variety isn't such a selling point to me, I just want it to work great, be of good quality, and look good.

Why are iPods still mentioned? The world has moved on, and it's upgraded to the iPhone.

15.4 million iPod touches is a huge number. This compares to the number of iPads sold.
The point is that 'declining' numbers isn't really relevant. Its the number of iOS devices sold that counts.
So iPod sales are rapidly shifting to iPod touch sales and thats really significant.
And I expect that after the transition is over the number of iPods sold will stabilize (or even grow again).
Also note that within wifi range you can (video) call via FaceTime and Skype and its a game device and an internet portal and 1/4 of the price of an iPhone.

Look, Apple makes great products and I can't stand companies that tries to copy off them. Apple earning and outselling every competitor is great news but if it's killing off every player in this field it's detrimental to us as consumers. Motorola & RIM are already dead. Apple is slowly lynching HP & Dell. Google and Windows will soon walk away into oblivion. It's always good to have choices even if they are bad choices. What if Apple kills off Amazon with Ibook, buys communication service provider like Verizon and kills off other service providers because they don't have Iphone, offers credit service and kills off Visa. Yes I'm over reaching here. But Apple has the money. Why buy manufacturers when they can buy out companies like Netflix and start Apple TV? Apple has the potential to kill off every company operating in US. How is that any good unless you own Apple stocks or working for Apple?

This makes absolutely no sense from any perspective. The consumer is not advantaged by having poor options or choices - that simply increases the opportunity to buy badly, not get the quality they deserve, and ultimately are worse off than if they had not bought a mediocre device to begin with.

Choice by itself is not an adequate criteria for positive consumer behavior. It is demonstrable and documented that too much choice creates confusion (see the 'Paradox of Choice' or 'The Revolt of the Masses') and actually adversely impacts consumer behavior and has a number of side effects like "analysis paralysis", and others.

Your examples are in extremis, flawed and unlikely to happen - Amazon does not rely on the Kindle series of devices for the majority of it's revenue, thus "iBook" cannot by itself "kill off Amazon", anymore than it has "killed-off" HP, Dell, Asus, Acer, Lenovo, or Sony. Apple categorically does not have the potential to ""kill off every company operating in the US" - how do you in any factual way come up with such an absurd concept??

Fact: Motorola and RIM are not dead - they may be hurting or crippled but certainly not dead. Google is not dead. Android is not dead. None of this deeply flawed argument holds any water at all - and you cite these ridiculous examples in support of mediocrity in choices - just so we can have "choices?"

Why not have a field of excellent choices - where devices, product and services vie to provide the consumer with the best possible experience for the money? Doesn't that make more sense than "I can have filet mognon - or eat out of a dumpster, at least I have a choice!"

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

This makes absolutely no sense from any perspective. The consumer is not advantaged by having poor options or choices - that simply increases the opportunity to buy badly, not get the quality they deserve, and ultimately are worse off than if they had not bought a mediocre device to begin with.

Choice by itself is not an adequate criteria for positive consumer behavior. It is demonstrable and documented that too much choice creates confusion (see the 'Paradox of Choice' or 'The Revolt of the Masses') and actually adversely impacts consumer behavior and has a number of side effects like "analysis paralysis", and others.

Your examples are in extremis, flawed and unlikely to happen - Amazon does not rely on the Kindle series of devices for the majority of it's revenue, thus "iBook" cannot by itself "kill off Amazon", anymore than it has "killed-off" HP, Dell, Asus, Acer, Lenovo, or Sony. Apple categorically does not have the potential to ""kill off every company operating in the US" - how do you in any factual way come up with such an absurd concept??

Fact: Motorola and RIM are not dead - they may be hurting or crippled but certainly not dead. Google is not dead. Android is not dead. None of this deeply flawed argument holds any water at all - and you cite these ridiculous examples in support of mediocrity in choices - just so we can have "choices?"

Why not have a field of excellent choices - where devices, product and services vie to provide the consumer with the best possible experience for the money? Doesn't that make more sense than "I can have filet mognon - or eat out of a dumpster, at least I have a choice!"

very well said, lousy choices are like having no choice at all. Every company mentioned has the option of turning out a unique, high quality products. Some actually do! Most seem to want to produce generally inferior "me too" products rather than innovate and produce something exciting!

04-17-2011, 08:08 PM
But given that for the first half of the year many countries are still being supplied with iPad 1 (and are desperately waiting for iPad 2), I think the TOTAL iPads sold in calendar 2011 should be past 36 million as Apple ramps past 3 million a month of iPad 2 towards the end of 2011. 40 million is possible but 50 million is too much to produce in 2011 especially with the Japan factor.

QFT Calendar 2011 iPad sales should be just over 40 million.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

04-17-2011, 08:08 PM
Now, the other thing is that Apple has been throwing around the 65,000 apps for iPad number for several months now. I think it has probably gone up past 80,000 and may be approaching 100,000 by middle of the year, depending on approval rates.